failure compiling Matrox Parhelia video driver...
 

The only thing I could do is trying to build such a driver on my 64
Studio, to see if I'll get the same errors. Please send the link. I
found http://www.matrox.com/graphics/de/support/drivers/ but there are
several drivers, but no Matrox version.

Do you run 2.1 x86? Unfortunately I'm running 3.0-beta3 amd64, but any
way, if you should run 3.0-beta3 x86 I would try to build it on my
machine, just to see if there will be trouble too.

If you run 2.1 you might like to install 3.0-beta3.
_______________________________________________
64studio-users mailing list
64studio-users@lists.64studio.com
http://lists.64studio.com/mailman/listinfo/64studio-users

failure compiling Matrox Parhelia video driver...
 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Rick Bolen (GM) wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I'm new to 64studio, but not new to Debian. I've run into a snag with
> 64s that I hope can be resolved.

Which version of 64Studio are you using?
>
> I need to compile Matrox's Parhelia video drivers for my system. I've
> downloaded the latest src from them and run their matrox...<version>.run
> file, but it initially errors with:
>
> make -C /lib/modules/2.6.29-1-multimedia-686/build
> M=/opt/matrox/matroxdriver-x86_32-cvs-20090511/kernel/src modules
> make: *** /lib/modules/2.6.29-1-multimedia-686/build: No such file or
> directory. Stop.
> make: *** [default] Error 2
>
> So suspecting a build environment issue, I began installing all the
> standard kernel building packages (source, headers, tools, etc) from 64s
> repositories, but bombed on build-essential because of Debian

sudo aptitude install build-essential
Does the previous error out?

> Bug#551023. So I'm not entirely confident I have a valid build env, but
> i don't know how to resolve bug 551023.
>
Can you be more specific? Which package is generating an error?

>
> Looking around un the lenny box, I see all kinds of symbolic links for
> various source files that I don't see in the 64s machine, so I'm
> thinking my 64s machine is seroiusly lacking in build env configuration,
> but i don't know how to fix it.
>
All I use is build essential and kernel-package (because I sometimes
build my own kernels). Nothing else should be needed.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAktAp4EACgkQwRXgH3rKGfP1fgCgrsxX7NuImD 6I+10ozO+Kprdn
BrsAnRAa+n6/9cRyBtzf+glQqtTmtogc
=ts+d
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
64studio-users mailing list
64studio-users@lists.64studio.com
http://lists.64studio.com/mailman/listinfo/64studio-users

failure compiling Matrox Parhelia video driver...
 

Gustin Johnson wrote:

> Which version of 64Studio are you using?
>
64Studio 3.0beta3

>> So suspecting a build environment issue, I began installing all the
>> standard kernel building packages (source, headers, tools, etc) from 64s
>> repositories, but bombed on build-essential because of Debian
>>
>
> sudo aptitude install build-essential
> Does the previous error out?
>
>
rickbol@64studio:~$ sudo apt-get -s install build-essential

Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
build-essential is already the newest version.
You might want to run `apt-get -f install' to correct these:
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
build-essential: Depends: libc6-dev but it is not going to be installed or
libc-dev
libstdc++6-4.2-dev: Depends: libc6-dev (>= 2.5) but it is not going to
be installed
E: Unmet dependencies. Try 'apt-get -f install' with no packages (or
specify a solution).

rickbol@64studio:~$ sudo apt-get -f install
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Correcting dependencies... Done
The following extra packages will be installed:
libc6-dev
Suggested packages:
glibc-doc manpages-dev
The following NEW packages will be installed:
libc6-dev
0 upgraded, 1 newly installed, 0 to remove and 9 not upgraded.
7 not fully installed or removed.
Need to get 0B/3344kB of archives.
After this operation, 13.5MB of additional disk space will be used.
Do you want to continue [Y/n]? y
(Reading database ... 100176 files and directories currently installed.)
Unpacking libc6-dev (from .../libc6-dev_2.7-10ubuntu5_i386.deb) ...
dpkg: error processing
/var/cache/apt/archives/libc6-dev_2.7-10ubuntu5_i386.deb (--unpack):
trying to overwrite `/usr/include/scsi/scsi.h', which is also in
package linux-libc-dev
Errors were encountered while processing:
/var/cache/apt/archives/libc6-dev_2.7-10ubuntu5_i386.deb
E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1)

>> Bug#551023. So I'm not entirely confident I have a valid build env, but
>> i don't know how to resolve bug 551023.
>>
>>
> Can you be more specific? Which package is generating an error?
>
>
build-essential

http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=551023

linux-libc-dev and libc6-dev are fighting over installing
/usr/include/scsi/scsi.h


> All I use is build essential and kernel-package (because I sometimes
> build my own kernels). Nothing else should be needed.
>
>
I typically follow the "building-a-kernel-the-debian-way" articles, but
they only add a few other packages. I just don't know if build-essential
will straighten-outadd required symlinks etc.

Thanks for any help,

Rick
_______________________________________________
64studio-users mailing list
64studio-users@lists.64studio.com
http://lists.64studio.com/mailman/listinfo/64studio-users

failure compiling Matrox Parhelia video driver...
 

Gustin Johnson wrote:
>
>> linux-libc-dev and libc6-dev are fighting over installing
>> /usr/include/scsi/scsi.h
>>
>
> I have build-essential installed on a number of Debian and Ubuntu
> machines as well as my 64Studio machine. No problems with any of them.
> My first guess is that there is a 3rd party repository or package that
> is causing you some grief.
>
> You can try to force the install by manually installing the .deb:
> sudo dpkg -i --force-all
> /var/cache/apt/archives/libc6-dev_2.7-10ubuntu5_i386.deb
>
>
I did this for libc6-dev and linux-libc* and this ended the log jam.
>>
>>
>> I typically follow the "building-a-kernel-the-debian-way" articles, but
>> they only add a few other packages. I just don't know if build-essential
>> will straighten-outadd required symlinks etc.
>>
>>
> "kernel-package" is the easiest way to build a kernel (or a header or
> source) .deb.
>
kernel-package in now installed, and linux-source-2.6.29,
build-essential, et al.

1) Do I need apply the patches that came with linux-source, or they
"pre-applied" and there only if needing to "unroll"?

2) What ".config" file do I use to build the stock 64Studio rt-kernel?

3) How do I stop make-kpkg from asking me all those ".config" questions?

My strategy to address this original problem is to build a new kernel
(and header files) per the recommendation here:

http://groups.google.co.jp/group/linux.debian.bugs.dist/browse_thread/thread/222248608991112d

Basically they get around this Makefile_32.cpu bug by generating new
headers from source. If this works, then it seems the 64Studio distro
could do it and replace the current header file downloads with corrected
ones?

I could go the patch route, but I don't understand how to apply the
patch. Do I,

1) cut and paste text sections out of the bug listing and save them to
xxx.patch files or something?

2) Is there more than one patch (separated by the ######## line)?

The suggestion is to:
"

$ cd /usr/share/kernel-package/ruleset/arches
$ sudo patch -p0 < patch_name
or
$ sudo patch -p1 < patch_name

"
I dont have a "/usr/share/kernel-package/ruleset/arches" dir... and I
don't know what "patch_name" refers to.

ANy advice?

Thanks
Rick





_______________________________________________
64studio-users mailing list
64studio-users@lists.64studio.com
http://lists.64studio.com/mailman/listinfo/64studio-users